I kinda see what you're saying now, but to me you don't need obviously different takes on each channel to get a sense of wideness, just normal human error when playing the takes is enough, because the way you describe it would mean that you'd basically have to fuck up each take to get enough variation for it to not sound "Big Mono"......right? (I'm not being sarcastic, I'm just trying to understand what you class as enough variation in a playing performance to make the tracks sound Stereo).
I think this technique is in the minority......I can think of maybe a handful of albums at the most that have a different guitar tone per side (most of which are 80's Thrash albums), where as I can think of thousands of albums where both sides have the same tone.
Personally a different tone per side is just distracting for me, and it annoys me, especially on headphones.
And maybe your movie theaters are different over there, but we have lush Stereo over here.
Can anyone find a description of "Big Mono" online........that isn't written by Chonchball?
When I said about the theater reference, I was reffering to surround sound which is a completely different animal than mono or stereo. People here keeping saying "either its mono OR its stereo", and that's just untrue. There's 5.1 surround and 7.1 surround and all kinds of different soundscapes. A few decades ago, they tried to introduce quadraphonics to the masses, but the impracticalities of the hi-fi systems inhibited it from really taking off. But think about that for a second. What is making it mono? what would make it stereo, and what could make it quad? You're splitting signals panoramically to achieve the perception of that sound being in two (or 4) places at once essentially. So with that said, the more different it sounds on one side versus the other side, the easier it is for your brain to calculate those differences and make them feel like they are existing in farther spaces from each other... but back to my main point.
I don't mean to make it sound like the takes need to be fucked up in order to achieve the clarity in tone from side to side, but that's technically correct on the level we're talking about, which is the sample level / millisecond level. And what I wanted to really point out is that the GOAL of metal now is to make everything so robotically inhuman, that the human error factor is removed. That's why everyone who comes here for the first time gets such a hard-on when they learn about DIing and ReAmping for the first time. "Oh wow, you mean I can make a real person sound like they're playing a MIDI guitar with a real guitar and program my solos and sweeps just like I can program 32 note blast beats in DFH!?!?! 8====D~~~~~
uke:"
So, yes, if you embrace and retain the human error element, which I encourage, the guitar takes will sit pretty on L and R and you'll hear them both and they won't phase out, and you'll have yourself a nice big loud guitar sound
BUT
If you have 2 guitar players, and you want those 2 guitar players parts to be more decipherable, it would behoove the mix to vary the tone so that the ear can separate the two sounds more clearly which ALSO gives the added perception of those instruments existing in the stereo spectrum FARTHER apart from each other.
---
I don't DISLIKE the sound of same settings on L & R, especially for metal, and especially when you want to have a balanced sound overall. Hell I do it all the time myself given the right circumstances. I understand tons of records have been done both ways, and one way isn't better than another depending on what you like and what you're going for. I'm just trying to explain what happens with the physical sound and your brain when you have similar sounds like that.
If you want loud guitars, use same-settings.
It will still sound in stereo (especially given the human error factor, or if you want to be a chode and just copy the audio and delay it a few milliseconds, it will still keep from canceling itself out)
If you want 2 readily distinguishable guitar sounds on L & R, use different settings.
You will help the listener decide what they are hearing more clearly, and for bands whose guitarists really like to share the spotlight, you will give them THEIR space in the sonic spectrum a bit more. Agreed this method can be slightly distracting, and it's not always the right choice, but it's still a matter of how the brain decodes the information it is getting.
I'm going to try to look up something I can cite on Big Mono. I by no means conjured up the term myself.
Good discussion? Or are we starting to beat a dead horse?
